DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 14th day of November 2017
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 07/02/2017
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(C.C.No.31/2017)
M.K.Gireeshkumar,
S/o Manikkan, Mattuppara house, - Complainant
Nemmara (PO), Palakkad
(By Adv.V.Shanmughanandan )
Vs
1.The Managing Director,
Lenova Pvt.Ltd.
Ferns Icon level-2,
Doddenakundi Village,
Marathathlli Post,
K.R.Puram, Hobili,
Bangalore – 560 037.
(By Adv.P.Fazil)
2. Managing Director,
NxtelSLP Sy.No.696,
Gundiapochampally Village,
Medchal Mandal,
Ranga Reddy District,
Secondarabad, Telungana – 501 401.
3. The Managing Director
Woya Electronics,
Souprabha,
Kunnathurmedu,
Near South Police Station, Palakkad. - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Smt.Shiny.P.R. President.
Brief facts of complainant.
On 3-1-2016 complainant has purchased a Lenovo Mobile Phone PAIF006In model No. Lenova K50a40 black colour IME 11869071025084550 for Rs.12,630/- from the 2nd opposite party. After ten days of its purchase the display of the mobile phone was not properly functioned and the colour system was also failed. The complainant submitted that the mobile phone has not obtained proper signals and it has no range at all. The mobile phone battery was very weak. After charging of mobile for 3 or 4 hours daily it become low immediately. The mobile phone is heated due to high radiation and on that reason the phone has not been used. Mobile phone is jamming every time. Due to the above complaint the complainant approached the 1st opposite party’s authorised mobile phone service centre at Palakkad. They reinstalled the mother board but the problem is not cured. The service centre give information to the complainant that the above said mobile phone mother board and panel have been spoiled irreparably and the same is not available in stock hence the problem is not solved. The complainant stated that the opposite parties have not properly done his service. Even after repeated demands opposite parties are failed to repair the mobile phone which shows deficiency of service, attitude of opposite parties caused much hardship to the complainant. The complainant sent a lawyer to notice to the opposite party. On the receipt of the said notice the 1st opposite party had sent a reply. So far the defect is not cleared. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for an order directing opposite parties to pay the cost of the mobile Rs.12,630/- and Rs.25,000/- for compensation for mental agony together with 12% interest from the date of the complaint till realization.
Complaint was admitted and issued notice to opposite parties. Notices to opposite party served. The opposite parties remained absent. Hence set ex-parte.
Complainant filed chief affidavit. Ext.A1 to A5 marked. MO1 also marked.
The following issues are considered
- Whether there is any unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?
- If so, what is the relief?
Issues 1 & 2
We have perused the documents filed by the complainant. It is obvious from Ext A1 that the complainant has purchased Lenovo Mobile Phone PAIF006In model No Lenova K50a40 black colour IME 11869071025084550 for Rs.12630/- from the 2nd opposite party. As per the pleadings in the complaint the defect was occurred within 10 days of its purchase. If the newly purchased mobile has got damage within a short span of time, it clearly shows the mobile has manufacturing defects of the mobile. Complainant submitted that several times complainant approached opposite parties to replace mobile or refund the cost of the same. But they did not do so. From the evidence adduced by the complainant, we arrived at a conclusion that by selling defective products, opposite parties committed unfair trade practice. And also we are of the view that opposite parties committed deficiency in service in not providing proper after sales service to the complainant. As the opposite party remained ex-parte, the evidence tendered by the complainant stands unchallenged. Hence the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant for the financial loss and mental agony sustained.
In the result complaint is allowed. Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.12, 630/- (Rupees twelve thousand six hundred and thirty only) towards the cost of mobile phone, Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost of proceedings.
Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest for the whole amount from the date of order till realization.
On payment of the ordered amount, opposite parties are at liberty to take back the mobile produced before the Forum.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 14th day of November 2017.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R.
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P.
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Photo copy of Retail Tax Invoice Bill dated.03-01-2016
Ext.A2 – Photocopy of Lenovo Catalog
Ext.A3 series – Photocopy of lawyer notice sent to opposite parties along with
postal receipts (3 No’s) dated.23.07.2016
Ext.A4 - Notice not received by 2nd opposite party (with cover)
Ext.A5 - Photo copy of interim reply sent by the opposite parties counsel
to complainant’s advocate
MO1 – Mobile Phone
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Nil
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite party
Nil
Cost
Rs.2,000/-allowed as cost of the proceedings.
